Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Validity of SCN proposing to declare the petitioners as wilful defaulters - Classification of Account as NPA - Impact of CIRP proceedings under IBC - The High Court held that NPA classification was deemed irrelevant to the determination of wilful default, and the Show-cause Notice was deemed valid. - The court ruled that the NPA classification was a separate issue from wilful default and that the petitioners' arguments regarding the classification's invalidity were not sustainable. - The court determined that the petitioners' legal rights were not infringed by the issuance of the Show-cause Notice, as they had the opportunity to respond to it. - The court found that the allegations in the Show-cause Notice provided sufficient grounds for declaring the petitioners as wilful defaulters, as per the Master Circular. - The court clarified that wilful defaulter proceedings were not subject to the moratorium imposed by Section 96 of the IBC.
Validity of SCN proposing to declare the petitioners as wilful defaulters - Classification of Account as NPA - Impact of CIRP proceedings under IBC - The High Court held that NPA classification was deemed irrelevant to the determination of wilful default, and the Show-cause Notice was deemed valid. - The court ruled that the NPA classification was a separate issue from wilful default and that the petitioners' arguments regarding the classification's invalidity were not sustainable. - The court determined that the petitioners' legal rights were not infringed by the issuance of the Show-cause Notice, as they had the opportunity to respond to it. - The court found that the allegations in the Show-cause Notice provided sufficient grounds for declaring the petitioners as wilful defaulters, as per the Master Circular. - The court clarified that wilful defaulter proceedings were not subject to the moratorium imposed by Section 96 of the IBC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.